AQUINO vs. COMELEC 248 SCRA 400 (1995)Topic: Composition, Qualification and Term of Office – House of Representatives

Facts: On March 20, 1995, Agapito Aquino (petitioner) filed his certificate of candidacy for the position of Representative for the new

Second Legislative District of Makati. As stated in his COC, he lives at 284 Amapola Cor. Adalla sts., Palm Village, Makati and that he has been residing in the area for 8 months.

On April 24, 1995, Move Makati, a registered political party, and the Chairman of the LAKAS-NUCD-UMDP filed a petition to disqualify Aquino on the ground that the he lacked the residence qualification to run as a congressman because the required residency it at least 1 year.

On April 25, 1995, a day after said petition for disqualification was filed, petitioner filed another certificate of candidacy amending the certificate dated March 20, 1995. Hence, Aquino changed his residency from 8 months to 1 year and 13 days.

On May 2, 1995, Aquino filed his answer praying for the dismissal of the disqualification case. On the same day, a hearing was conducted by the COMELEC where in the petitioner testified and showed different pieces of evidence such as his lease contract between a certain Leonor Feliciano.

After the hearing, COMELEC dismissed the disqualification case against Aquino. On May 8, 1995, the elections were held with three candidates vying for the congressional seat in the Second district. May 10, 1995, private respondents, Move Makati and Bedon, filed an Urgent Motion Ad Cautelum to Suspend Proclamation of

petitioner. Thereafter, they filed an Omnibus Motion for Reconsideration of the COMELEC's Second Division resolution dated May 6, 1995 and a 2nd Urgent Motion Ad Cautelum to Suspend Proclamation of petitioner

May 15, 1995, COMELEC en banc issued an Order suspending petitioner's proclamation May 16, 1995, petitioner filed his Comment/Opposition with urgent motion to lift order of suspension of proclamation. On June 1, 1995, petitioner filed a "Motion to File Supplemental Memorandum and Motion to Resolve Urgent Motion to Resolve

Motion to Lift Suspension of Proclamation" June 2, 1995, the COMELEC en banc issued a Resolution reversing the resolution of the Second Division

ISSUE: WON Aquino had an actual change of domicile

HELD/RATIO: No. Domicile of origin is not easily lost. Aquino failed to prove that he has the intention of abandoning his former residence. Hence, his assertion that he has transferred his domicile from Tarlac to Makati is a bare assertion which is hardly supported by the facts in the case at bench.

“As found by the COMELEC en banc, the petitioner in his Certificate of Candidacy for the May 11, 1992 elections, indicated not only that he was a resident of San Jose, Concepcion, Tarlac in 1992 but that he was a resident of the same for 52 years immediately preceding that election. 23 At the time, his certificate indicated that he was also a registered voter of the same district. 24 His birth certificate places Concepcion, Tarlac as the birthplace of both of his parents Benigno and Aurora. 25 Thus, from data furnished by petitioner himself to the COMELEC at various times during his political career, what stands consistently clear and unassailable is that this domicile of origin of record up to the time of filing of his most recent certificate of candidacy for the 1995 elections was Concepcion, Tarlac.”

In order that petitioner could qualify as a candidate for Representative of the Second District of Makati City, he must prove that he has established not just residence but domicile of choice.

Petitioner, in his certificate of candidacy for the 1992 elections, indicated not only that he was a resident of San Jose, Concepcion, Tarlac in 1992 but that he was a resident of the same for 52 years immediately preceding that elections. At that time, his certificate indicated that he was also a registered voter of the same district. His birth certificate places Concepcion, Tarlac as the birthplace of his parents. What stands consistently clear and unassailable is that his domicile of origin of record up to the time of filing of his most recent certificate of candidacy for the 1995 elections was Concepcion, Tarlac.

The intention not to establish a permanent home in Makati City is evident in his leasing a condominium unit instead of buying one. While a lease contract maybe indicative of petitioner’s intention to reside in Makati City, it does not engender the kind of permanency required to prove abandonment of one’s original domicile.

Petitioner’s assertion that he has transferred his domicile from Tarlac to Makati is a bare assertion which is hardly supported by the facts. To successfully effect a change of domicile, petitioner must prove an actual removal or an actual change of domicile; a bona fide intention of abandoning the former place of residence and establishing a new one and definite acts which correspond with the purpose. In the absence of clear and positive proof, the domicile of origin should be deemed to continue.